New self-sustaining test was far superior to previous E-Cat tests. It gave us very good quality data and also the steam quality issue was finally resolved hopefully even for the most hard headed critics. Test clearly shows that steam quality was ca. 99-98% as it is the case with all water boilers. There is no such thing as low quality steam relevant with E-Cat, because it does not exist in close to normal pressures. But steam and hot water are separate entities. This is shown very clearly when the outlet hose was removed and hot water was collected into bucket. High quality steam (ca. 99-98%) escaped, but liquid water content was flown gently into bucket.
This was also very good reminder how easy it is to do calorimetry from steam. Just separate hot water content and steam from each other. Total enthalpy can be measured easily just by sparging steam/hot water into cool water bucket and measure the temperature change. This gives the enthalpy nice and cleanly. As steam temperature is directly proportional with total enthalpy, we can then find out easily the proper relationship of steam temperature and enthalpy, thus we see the heating power of E-Cat directly from the temperature of steam. And Rossi knows this this relationship exactly. In the recent test, we can find out that water inflow rate was ca. 11 kg/h and there was hot water collected 5-6 kg/h. Too bad that we have only one data point here and we have some uncertainty with water flow rate, because it was not constant but was perhaps correlated with internal steam pressure of E-Cat. However we can safely say that approximately half of the water was evaporated and half was in liquid form. This was only the case when the boiling temperature was ca. 118°C and pressure thus 190 kPa. Later steam temperature rose into 133.7°C and thus pressure exceeded 300 kPa. This indicates that more than 80% of inlet water was evaporated. This shows that Rossi can control and understands his reactor very well, because he can push E-Cat to the limits of the cooling power of water. If there had been any more heat production, it would have vaporized all the water and that means that there is nothing that cools down the reactor core. We can say that almost all inlet water was evaporated, and peak heating power was 6-7 kW, when the pressure was around 300 kPa. It is difficult to establish good error margins because we do not have all the details, especially inlet water flow rate might be problematic, because it should not be constant. That is because the pump pumps water with overpressure of 300 kPa (IIRC). If it needs to do work against up to 200 kPa steam overpressure, then flow rate should decrease inversely proportional to the heating power of E-Cat. When the peristaltic pump was calibrated without backpressure, it pumped water 15.8 kg/h. When there was not steam pressure inside E-Cat, water was pumped ca. 13 kg/h and when steam pressure was rising due to boiling, water pumping level was reduced to 11 kg/h. This should be consistent with the fact that peristaltic pump pumps water only with pressure of something like 300 kPa and if there is significant overpressure inside E-Cat, pump is slowing down. We should have a graph that shows the water inflow speed during the whole experiment if we are to establish exact calorimetry. Therefore I would estimate that errormargins are ±1kW. What means that they are quite significant. I am somewhat disappointed, because I thought that we could go even higher accuracy. But the uncertainty of inlet water flow was too great to make any more accurate estimation. Also only one datapoint at 118°C did not help with accuracy. What must be noted from Mats Lewan’s report that it is gross mistake to think that E-Cat operates in close to normal pressure. No, it is not possible, because superheated steam and liquid water cannot coexist. Also the specific heat of superheated steam is low, therefore it cannot maintain smooth temperature graph. Also visual evidence from the video of high pressure steam is more than clear. Indeed E-Cat does operate in high pressure and I am surprised that he still sticks with this false assumption. Lewan also did error with the idea that liquid water overflowing would indicate that opening for exit hose is large. No, it does not tell that, because pump pumps water with 300 kPa (IIRC) pressure, therefore it can push liquid water through a hole that is just few millimeters in diameter. Overpressure seems to be hard peace for many, perhaps because Galantini “measured the pressure inside E-Cat” to be same as room pressure, although he misread his instrument and did not understand that his instrument does indeed measure the room pressure, not the pressure where humidity probe reside. From previous versions, the diameter of steam exit orifice has considerably shrunk. As similar power range E-Cat produced in December experiment 10 kPa overpressure, now new E-Cat produced 20 fold higher overpressure. As the power of E-Cat was just ca. 6 kW ± 1kW, E-Cat was deliberately operating at lower power level in test phase due to safety issues. However, Rossi has said that final product will produce 200°C steam at pressure of 1.6 MPa. This should be quite well in line if E-Cat module is operating at full power of 27 kW. Anyways, Rossi presented excellent and ready for market product that will produce 200°C steam. This is very much enough steam for many industrial applications and even for limited electric power production. Certainly this is enough for home appliances. We need to only hope that there is no a fuel cell that burns ethanol or other liquid carbon fuel. E-Cat produced more than 30 MJ excess energy conservatively estimated. But as test was cancelled in half way, there was still remaining other 30 MJ to be produced. As the energy density of ethanol is 24 MJ/L, then it would tell us that at least 3 liters ethanol was required to fake demonstration. Certainly this possibility is not out of question. On the other hand, I would say that the cost of that fake megawatt power plan was some hundreds of kilodollars, I would say that his approach to do fakes is not the most cost effective. Therefore I would consider a fake option highly unlikely, although I admit that E-Cat is just far too good to be true. This time demonstration was just perfect. It also shows that really, calorimetry is far easier and more reliable to do from steam than from sub-boiling water, because only thing what is required to measure is the steam pressure. The relationship between pressure and total enthalpy is very easy to establish with simple tests; steam sparging test that measures total enthalpy and with hot water and steam separation test we can quickly establish how much steam was generated inside E-Cat. Then we can just establish relationship between enthalpy and steam temperature and ultimately we need to monitor only steam temperature and we can know total enthalpy very accurately. I would say that Rossi debunked here Krivit’s debunking! –Jouni Ps. although I criticized Mr. Lewan hear quite harshly, his test was absolutely brilliant in all the other aspects. And he has also done absolutely brilliant work with reporting the adventures of E-Cat and indeed he is my favorite E-Cat scientist, because my appreciation goes for the scientist who knows the basics and does know how to calibrate the thermometer. However too bad that the September test was cancelled, although I am sure that we saw "enough" and decision was "rational".
